MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1486342910 · doi:10.1177/1090198115596164

“Dulling the Edges”

2015· article· en· W1486342910 on OpenAlexafffund
Genevieve Creighton, John L. Oliffe, J. L. Matthews, Elizabeth Saewyc

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education & Behavior · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSadnessGriefGrounded theoryPsychologyFeelingMasculinityQualitative researchBinge drinkingAccidentalNarrativeDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPoison controlSuicide preventionMedicinePsychiatryAngerSociologyPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The death of a male friend can be challenging for men because expressions of grief can be governed and restrained by dominant ideals of masculinity. It is common for young men to engage in health risk practices, such as alcohol overuse, to deal with feelings of sadness. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study investigated the ways that young men use alcohol in the process of grieving the accidental death of a male friend. METHOD: Participants included 35 men 19 to 25 years old and 22 men 26 to 35 years old who participated in individual semistructured interviews between 2010 and 2012. RESULTS: Methodology informed by grounded theory and narrative analysis was used to analyse and interpret the transcribed interviews, focusing on the ways that men used alcohol in the grief process. Through data analysis we inductively derived three themes: (1) Using Alcohol to Dull the Pain, (2) Using Alcohol to Purge Sadness, and (3) Troubled Drinking. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence to show that men's binge drinking following tragic loss is a means to express emotion and connect with others. Health interventions for young men who have lost a male peer need to be sensitive to gendered norms that inform grief practices and work with them to discern pathways toward recovery that promote long-term wellness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.177
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Education & BehaviorSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207